Bengaluru: Imagine paying a hefty sum for a promised hair transplant, only to walk out with a wig instead. That’s exactly what happened to a Bengaluru resident. He moved the Bangalore Urban II Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, alleging deficiency in service. The consumer commission ordered a refund with 6% interest and Rs 5,000 compensation.The saga began when Alex Pillai (name changed), a 54-year-old from Eegipura, visited Max Hair Studio International Pvt Ltd, Lavelle Road, on Aug 10, 2024, for a hair transplant consultation. He paid Rs 500 in cash and an initial Rs 5,000 via credit card. After the consultation, he paid Rs 55,000 the following day for the procedure.Pillai claimed he explicitly informed the studio that he wanted a hair transplant with “100% results.” However, after the studio’s health experts reviewed his personal health details, medical issues, family background, and daily job routine, it advised him to have a wig instead. Pillai was not interested but was assured that if the wig was not fixed properly and not looking good, and if any defects were found in the wig, the full payment would be refunded. Trusting this assurance, he agreed to have the wig fixed instead of undergoing hair transplantation.When the wig was fitted, he was not satisfied with the result, feeling it did not appear good on his face. He immediately requested a refund. While the studio initially promised to refund the amount online, the payment was never made. Eventually, the studio allegedly informed Pillai that the refund would not be done, leaving him feeling aggrieved and cheated.Pillai filed a consumer complaint on June 20, 2025, alleging deficiency of service and unfair trade practices. A notice was issued to Max Hair Studio, but the studio failed to appear before the commission and was placed ex-parte.After going through all the documents, the commission observed the studio’s failure to appear amounted to an implied admission of Pillai’s claims. The commission noted that retaining the payment without delivering the assured service constituted a clear case of deficiency of service and unfair trade practice.The commission bench, comprising president Vijaykumar M Pawale and member Anuradha V, ordered the studio to take the wig back and refund Rs 55,000 with 6% interest from the day of payment till realisation and Rs 5,000 as compensation for mental agony and litigation costs.
